The notion that Al Qaeda is responsible for the fires in california.

Yes, a big part of current new is the fires now in California.

All the news reporters went there and explained the situation quite truthfully. A fire started by heat and high winds.

Except, of course, Fox news…who insisted on giving Americans irrational terror…by saying that these forest fires were a secret evil plot held by terrorists.

They have no evidence to back up this laughable conspiracy theory…except one FOUR YEAR OLD FBI memo.

The memo has not been proven accurate…and did not even mention California.

Let's compare the two theories:

Theory 1: It was a regular forest fire just like all forest fires. It was caused naturally. Heat and high winds caused it. It is probably partially contributed to climate change…considering that on the other side of the world (Greece) there is a similar occurrence.

Theory 2, or "the theory that only Fox news would take seriously": A bunch of evil terrorist bad guys that wore turbans were in their underground lair plotting how to destroy freedom. At the end of the table was Osama Bin Laden. Along the long table were his hideous Barbarian minions. Osama said: "And now, my minions…you shall finally taste American blood again" (his evil minions hooted loudly and shook their AK-47's over their heads) He continued: "We have set are orbiting death ray to ‘forest fire' and aimed it towards California…we attack tomorrow! Moo-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!" He ended the meeting by saying: "ah yes…and in New York we will make heavy snow, and light showers in London!" His minions flew off into the night sky (they have wings).

OK, fine…not exactly. They actually said that they used electronic, remote detonators for the fires and that the terrorists did not leave any finger prints. But it is almost as far-fetched.

Using the principle of Occam's razor, we can determine that the first theory (compared to the real 2nd theory…not my version) is more logical. It is silly to make wild assumptions based on 4 year old memos…assumptions that have to do with strange, unclear conspiracies of terrorists using remote explosive devices.

The guy on Fox and Friends says

"I don't know if whoever did this was checking the weather channel because they picked, unfortunately, the perfect time to set these fires because the weather there is so dry"

Hmmmmm…Dry weather,…forest fire….dry weather,…forest fire…there MUST be some connection…There is dry weather…there is a forest fire…What is the connection?

Well, the connection is that DRY WEATHER CAUSES FOREST FIRES.

Seriously, though…according to Occam's razor…we must assume the simplest answer. The simplest answer is that it is a forest fire. The answer that needlessly factors in to many entities is the theory that it was an extremely intricate plot by terrorists.

Let me start off by saying that we live in dangerous times. Not only by the natural, but also by the unnatural hatred that mankind has produced for one another. Wars and attacks are epidemic, and the world is because more and more dangerous. It is not the most fun thing to think about, but it needs to be addressed.

9/11 was a sad day for all of us. The callous terrorist organization known as al-Qaeda, massacred three thousand Americans in a single day. These murderers are ruthless, cruel, coldblooded, and hate your freedom. They hate us irrationally, and would do anything to strike us down. They detest you, and they attempted to burn down part of Southern California.

What my opponent is trying to make you believe does make a lot of sense. However, you'll notice that he never provides ANY evidence to support his cause. Sure. I'll have to admit that a four-year-old memo is not much, but how does it fair against… well… nothing!

I also find it quite suspicious that a memo would say that al-Qaeda would start fires, and just four years later, more than five different fires spontaneously appear, ALL AT THE SAME TIME AND AROUND THE SAME GENERAL AREA, burning more than a quarter million acres, and displacing more than a million people. Is that not quite odd?

Here is what you, the audience, must decide:

· Vote for Harlen and believe someone providing no evidence, or…
· Vote for me, and know that you're voting for either what's true, or EXCEPTIONALLY coincidental.

It seems that people in the comments section of this debate seem confused as to my real position on this issue. If you look further in the comments, you'll see my real opinions on the topic at hand. Thank you.

----

It's a shame that my opponent Harlan was unable to respond to my arguments. I was really looking forward to them. In the mean time though, I will introduce additional points to further strengthen my argument.

al-Qaeda did maliciously murder three thousand Americans in a single day. That has been established. Knowing that, I then ask myself, "Could they have started the fires if they wanted to?" Of course they could! If they could hijack four commercial jet liners, three of them hitting and killing innocent civilians, they could easily start the major fires.

And they really were MAJOR fires. Fires like this have not been seen in California, in a long, long time. One MILLION people were evacuated, destroying a quarter million acres of land. Hundreds of families' lives were ruined because of this. Harlan, you act like this was just any other fire, but it wasn't. This was catastrophic.

To add to that, an al-Qaeda detainee even admitted to the fire plot! He told us that al-Quada was responsible:

But the bottom line is this. There is no 100% way of knowing. At one point there was even speculation that a small child started them while playing with a lighter! So, what you are forced to do, is look at all the possibilities, and decide what is most likely. I'll briefly run through all of them.

· A small child could have started them, but with more evidence obtained, it was dropped. Not much media has really talked about it since then. This is the most unlikely.
· The fires could have been natural. However, there can never possibly be evidence to prove this. So, you must weigh this possibility other possibilities.
· The fires were maliciously cause by al-Qaeda. Evidence backs this up. A memo claimed that al-Qaeda would start major fires in America, and an al-Qaeda detainee even fessed up the plot. Only one possibility should stand out.

Again, recall that these fires were one of California's worst. I live in Southern California, and although my house was luckily about ten miles away from any fire, I had a severe cough. Given that, not only can you say that the damage was to all the burned down homes, but to the health of the population from everyone around.

I'm not one for ad hominem, but in both my opponents turns, he did post comments in the comments section, and he did continue on with some of his other debates. I ask myself, 'Why would Harlan not want to debate with me when he so passionately (as evident by his first and only post) believes that the fires were not started by al-Qaeda? He is obviously around!' And all the time I come to only one conclusion that he can not defeat my arguments. This is a done deal and the winner should be obvious.

Let me quickly summarize how the debate has gone so far:

· Through extremely offensive sarcasm, my opponent, Harlan, attempted to make the point that the recent fires in California were not caused by al-Qaeda. Mind you, this is the ONLY argument he ever made in this entire debate.
· I made the point of a memo received by the FBI that said that al-Qaeda would maliciously cause fires in America, and hinted that this fire in particular were exceptional in the way of magnitude.
· My opponent forfeited his round.
· I then went on to discover that an al-Qaeda detainee even admitted to forging a plot to burn down California, and very vividly described how this was unlike any fire seen in California before. I also mention the adverse health effects of the fire.
· My opponent again forfeits his round.

So you see, if you vote for Harlan, you vote for someone who has only brought sarcasm to the table, and has run away from the debate. However, if you vote for me, then you are not only pushing away from the pattern of debate.com's voters, but you vote for the sure fact that al-Qaeda started the catastrophic fires in California.

Do the right thing.